Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
B.S. Bhanumathi, J.
State Represented by its
Dy. Superintendent of Police – Petitioner
versus
Ganti Venkata Satya Bhaskar Prasad – Respondent
Criminal Revision Case No.203 of 2023
Decided on 16.3.2023
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Sections 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(c) and (d) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 156, 167, 418, 420, 465, 468, 471, 409, 201, 109 r/w 120-B – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 41-A – Siphoning of funds released from Public Exchequer by participating in deep rooted conspiracy – Refusal to remand accused – It is duty of Magistrate while remanding accused to judicial custody to verify contents of allegations and also to see whether allegations would make out offences alleged against accused – Detailed report with support of statements of witnesses, other reports of investigation has been filed clearly mentioning role of accused in commission of offences by way of participating in crucial meetings, inflation of valuation, manipulation of MOA and creating fake entities to which fund was transferred – Section 409 of IPC is not limited to public servant alone, but other categories as well – In view of legal position that Section 120-B IPC creates an offence by itself, same cannot be totally ignored by Special Judge – There is no need to refer role of accused spelt out in remand report point by point – But allegations would attract offences for which his remand is sought is not covered by Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. – Impugned order set aside. (Paras 16, 25, 26, 27 and 28)
Result: Criminal Revision Case allowed.
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case is filed against the refusal to remand the 1st respondent herein who is the Accused No.35 in Crime No.29 of 2021 of C.I.D. Police Station, Mangalagiri by the learned Judge of Special Court SPE and ACB cases cum III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada vide the order dated 09.03.2023.
2. The Crime No.29 of 2021 is registered on 09.12.2021 for the offences punishable under Section 156, 167, 418, 420, 465, 468, 471, 409, 201, 109 r/w 120B IPC and Section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(c) and (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
3.a. The case of the prosecution is briefly that the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.M/s.No.47 (HE)(EC.A2) Department, dated 13.12.2014 incorporating Andhra Pradesh State Skill Development Corporation (hereinafter referred as ‘APSSDC’). The object of SIEMENS Project/Scheme is to impart high end technology to the trainers. APSSDC deputed a team to visit SIEMENS Centres of Excellence already established in Gujarat and to submit a report. SIEMENS offers training programme in collaboration with various State Governments. In the negotiations, the State Government agreed to establish SIEMENS centers of excellence, technical skill development institutions and skill development centers in different clusters. Six such clusters have been formed at the inceptions by incurring Rs.546,84,18,908/- (90%) and Government’s share of Rs.55,00,00,000/- (10%). To that effect, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) has been entered into between APSSDC and SIEMENS.
3.b. SIEMENS is a combination of M/s.SIEMENS Industry Software (India) Private Limited and M/s.Design Tech Systems Private Limited. The MOA is in furtherance of the G.O.M/s.No.4, dated 30.06.2017 of Skill Development Entrepreneurship and Innovation (Skills) Department. A tax investigation by the Additional Director General, GST, Intelligence, Pune, in respect of clients availing of CENVAT credit by M/s. Design Tech Systems Private Limited and M/s. Skillar Enterprises India Private Limited led to unearthening a huge financial scam involving crores of rupees by M/s. SIEMENS Industries Software India Private Limited and M/s. Design Tech Systems Private Limited. The funds relate to APSSDC. As per the MOA, M/s. Design Tech has to provide training in Software Development including various sub-modules designed for high end software for advance manufacturing CAD/CAM. The MOA does not contemplate sub-contract. However, SIEMENS and M/s. Design Tech sub-contracted a large part of its work to M/s. Skillar Enterprises Private Limited, New Delhi with self-centric Solomon’s Wisdom. As a matter of fact, M/s. Skillar was established after M/s. Design Tech had entered into a contract with APSSDC. It is the claim of M/s. Design Tech that M/s. Skillar provided training in software development, including various sub-modules designed for high end software for advance manufacturing CAD/CAM. M/s. Skillar directly supplied the same to the Skill Development Centers in Andhra Pradesh.
3.c. M/s. Design Tech further claims that royalty and subscription were paid to M/s. Skillar since they have developed the software. When the tax authorities confronted M/s. Skillar, M/s. Skillar claimed that no technical work has been subcontracted and the training software development, including various other sub-modules provided in the invoices. Thus, the Additional DGGI, Pune concluded that both the service provider and service receiver had taken contradictory stands regarding the nature of services. An in depth scrutiny into the records by ADGGI, Pune revealed that training software development including various sub-modules shown as supplied by M/s. Skillar to M/s. Design Tech were purchased by M/s. Skillar from—
(i) M/s. Allied Computers International (Asia) Limited, Mumbai,
(ii) M/s. Patrick Info Services Private Limited, M/s. I.T. Smith Solutions Private Limited,
(iii) M/s. Inweb Info Services Private Limted, all based at New Delhi,
(iv) M/s. Ari
It is duty of Magistrate while remanding accused to judicial custody to verify contents of allegations and also to see whether allegations would make out offences alleged against accused.
object of bail is to secure appearance of the accused person at his trial by a reasonable amount of bail. Unless it can be required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial where called ....
Deliberate concealment of material facts can lead to the rejection of an application for Transit Anticipatory Bail.
Order granting bail must demonstrate application of mind as to why applicant has been granted or denied privilege of bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of remand must be based on a proper understanding of the law, including the provisions of Sec. 41 Cr.P.C. and the guidelines lai....
Procedural irregularities in criminal trials can result in quashing convictions if fair trial principles are violated.
Prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act is only required for offenses relating to public officials' duties; misconduct that constitutes a crime does not benefit from this....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
